District 5 Diary

Thursday, July 09, 2015

Political correctness in SF and Mumia Abu-Jamal

C.W. Nevius quotes Willie Brown in this morning's column about the killing of Kathryn Steinle:

As former mayor and Chronicle columnist Willie Brown told me this week, “I think our elected types need to be sure they don’t use political correctness to put the lives of the public in danger.”

Just so. But let's harken back to when Brown was Mayor of San Francisco and he declared August 16, 1997, as "Justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal Day."

Fast forward to September 27, 2004, when the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a Resolution "urging a new trial for Mumia Abu Jamal," who was sentenced to death after he killed a Philadelphia cop.

But the evidence was overwhelming. A jury---and not all the members were white as it included two African Americans---convicted Abu-Jamal and sentenced him to death. After police pulled over Abu-Jamal's brother for driving the wrong way on a one-way street, a battle followed. [Daniel]Faulkner was shot five times, once between the eyes. Authorities found Abu-Jamal near the mortally wounded Faulkner because he could not run away as his brother did; Faulkner had shot Abu-Jamal in the chest. Also, four eyewitnesses identified Abu-Jamal. Two witnesses heard Abu-Jamal admit to shooting Faulkner and saying that he hoped Faulkner would die.

Scott Wiener's "contempt for voters"

Regarding “Wiener will run for State Senate” (July 1): In his pitch to voters to elect him to the State Senate, Supervisor Scott Wiener said, “I think it’s very important to have principles and be very clear about them.”

I would agree that Wiener has been very clear about his distrust of San Francisco voters during his time at City Hall. First, Wiener sponsored a ballot measure to let politicians repeal voter-approved ballot initiatives, which the voters overwhelmingly defeated.

Next, Wiener opposed giving voters a voice in waterfront development that the voters overwhelmingly approved. Earlier this year, Wiener proposed a measure to restrict the ability of citizens to put initiatives on the ballot at all, which was so clearly unpopular and destined to lose that Wiener eventually abandoned the idea altogether.

If San Francisco voters promote a politician who has repeatedly shown contempt for the voice of the voters, will he do more of the same in Sacramento? Wiener’s record has made that answer very clear.